F 69 
C97 
Copy 1 





---^^^1^- 



ADDRESS 



PEI 



/ 



y 



^ /^ IoaajUZ^ 





m 



«r 



*rr. 








^W' ^' (^(-^i < ' '■■*'''^-^^' 




ADDRESS 



PEOPLE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 
^ 



^e 



^ J^^>^r^i4 V>vWv^ \i As^ * •. 



V "^.^^-^t K-.^^ -^. 


^. rt\ 




> rt'\ 




c^n 



\ 






TO THE PEOPLE OF MASSIWETTS. 



The undersigned, members of the Senate, and House of 
Representatives, of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, de- 
sire to address you on a subject of great public concern. They 
wish to ask your attention to certain transactions, which have 
passed under their notice, and which demand your serious con- 
sideration. 

It is known to you, that, at the election of State officers in 
November last, the Free Soil and Democratic parties were sep- 
arate political organizations, having different candidates for 
Governor, and publicly professing very different political prin- 
ciples. You sent to the Legislature members of each of these 
political parties, who had theretofore held the distinctive polit- 
ical principles of each, and who were elected because they 
were known to hold those principles. On the first day of Jan- 
uary, the Legislature assembled, and its members, including 
the persons above referred to, were sworn. . On the evening of 
that day, the Democratic members of the Legislature came 
together in caucus, at a room in the State House in Boston, 
and at the same time, and in another room in the same build- 
ing, the Free Soil members of the Legislature also met in a 
distinct caucus. Each of these bodies on that evening appoint- 
ed a committee, to meet and confer in regard to all the offices 
to be filled by the Legislature. 

These committees met for this conference on the evening of 
January the second, and the Free Soil committee " proposed to 
concede the Governor to the Democrats, 07i condition that the 
United States Senator for six years should be conceded to the 
Free Soilers." What was intended by ^^ conceding^' the Gov- 
ernor to the Democrats, was explained by the Free Soil com- 



mittee to be this : "The Free Soilers were ready to elect Mr. 
Boutwell without any pledges whatever ; they were wiHing to 
place the government of the State in the hands of the Democ- 
racy, asking no pledges for pri7iciplcs, measures, or offices." 
But, at the same time, they had so little confidence in the men 
to whom the administration of all State affairs would thus be 
confided, that they thought it necessary to make an explicit 
declaration, that " they would give no pledges to support his 
(Gov. Bout well's) administration, aiid woiild take no responsi- 
bility for it ;^^ so that they were willing, and then oflfered, by 
their votes as members of the Legislature, to confide the whole 
executive power of the State, with no restriction as to princi- 
ples, or measures, to a man whom they so distrusted, that they 
expressly stipulated not to be in any way responsible for any- 
thing he might do. 

In consideration of this, they required that the United States 
Senator should be conceded to them ; and they went on to 
explain the meaning of this. It was, that " the Senator, who- 
ever he might be, must go to Washington uncommitted to any 
party, or any set of men ; he must stand iipon the principles 
publicly recogtiized by the party with which he acted.^' That 
is, the Free Soilers were to select a person not yet fixed upon, 
the Democrats were to elect him, by their votes as members of 
the Legislature, and he was to act in the Senate of the United 
States, upon the principles of the Free Soil party, the Demo- 
cratic party having no right whatever to expect him to act on 
their political principles. 

Such was the bargain proposed by one of these committees 
to the other ; it was agreed to on the spot by both ; and, as will 
hereafter be seen, members of those committees, under this bar- 
gain, voted for Mr. Sumner, and their votes were necessary to 
his election. Each committee afterwards reported to its respect- 
ive constituents, in caucus assembled, the above arrangement to 
concede the Governor to the Democrats and the Senator to the 
Free-Soilers, and each caucus finally assented thereto. Subse- 
quently, Mr. Charles Sumner was selected by the Free Soil 
caucus, as their candidate for the office of Senator ; his name 
was sent to the Democratic caucus, and a majority of this body 
voted to cast their ballots in his favor. Such is a brief state- 
ment of this transaction, so far as it relates to the office of Sen- 



ator of the United States, as deduced from printed statements 
made by parties who acted on each committee, and had promi- 
nent parts in these affairs.* We have foreborne to say anything 
of the negotiations about minor offices, desiring to present dis- 
tinctly the main subject. 

The bargain being struck, it remained to execute it. Mr. 
Boutwell was elected Governor — the Free Soil Members of the 
Legislature voting for him, in pursuance of their contract. Mr. 
Sumner was chosen by the Senate to fill the office of Senator 
of the United States; every Democratic Senator, twelve in 
number, — except Mr. Beach of Hampden, and one other who 
was absent, — voting for him, in execution of their compact, and 
their votes being necessary for his election. 

The balloting in the House of Representatives was begun. 
It was found that certain members of the Democratic party, 
about ninety in number, voted for him, while others did 
not do so, and no choice was made. And thereupon, through 
the newspapers, in private conferences, and by public declara- 
tions, the members of the Free Soil party insisted that it was a 
matter of compact and agreement that the members of the Dem- 
ocratic party would vote for a person to be selected by the Free 
Soilers, and that Mr. Sumner had been selected by them ; that 
the members of that party who did vote for him, acted in pur- 
suance of a binding contract, the consideration of which had 
already been paid by placing the State Government in Demo- 
cratic hands; that they who refused so to vote, were guilty of 
bad faith ; that there was no liberty of choice, but an absolute 
and perfect obligation, springing from a contract to vote for a 
person to be selected by the Free Soilers. No matter who might 
be presented as a candidate for their suffrages — no matter if it 
should appear, in the course of the contest, that the Democratic 
votes would elect a man whom every Democrat in Massachu- 
setts would desire to place in the Senate — they were bound, 
hand and foot, by this bargain : " that the Free Soil party had 
a right to the specific performance of the contract, deliberately 

* These statements were signed H. W., and are known to have proceeded from 
the pen of Henry Wilson, Esq., -who fills the office of President of the Senate — 
C. S., the initials of Caleb Stetson, Esq., a member of the House from Braintree — 
another statement by Frederic Robinson, Esq., a Senator from Essex — and another, 
attributed to James S. "Whitney, Esq., a member of the Hoiise from Conway. 



entered into by the Demoaats, the consideration foj- which they 
had already received.'^ 

On the other hand, the Democratic members who refused to 
vote for Mr. Sumner, denied that they, as individuals, had en- 
gaged to vote for him. With this charge of what is called " bad 
faith " we do not meddle. It may be true or false. But it is 
an issue quite collateral to the main subject. The Free Soilers 
assert that they bought and paid for all the Democratic votes. 
These members in effect say, the Free Soilers bought and paid 
for only three quarters of them, and that they themselves were 
not included in the conveyance. This is very important to the 
honor and principle of these individuals ; but, inasmuch as three 
quarters, who are admitted on all hands to have been purchased, 
effected the election of Mr. Sumner, there seems to be no ne- 
cessity to determine with precision just how many that purchase 
embraced. 

In this position of parties, the balloting was resumed from 
time to time, and after spending ten days in fruitless attempts 
to make a choice, a streinious effort was made by the Whig 
members of the House to postpone the matter indefinitely. 
Their desire was to save the valuable time of the Legislature, 
and to bring the whole subject of the Senatorial election, and 
the conduct of parties in reference thereto, before the People of 
the Commonwealth, and allow their judgment to operate deci- 
sively thereon. It was known to them that the pendency of 
this election, and the extraordinary means resorted to by the 
Free Soil party to carry their candidate, were exercising a most 
prejudicial effect upon the business of the session ; that it hung 
like a cloud over the minds of members ; that it absorbed their 
thoughts and their time; and that, at no period in the history 
of the State, had so little public business been transacted in the 
same length of time. It was their desire to relieve the State 
from the enormous expense, as well as the hazard of imperfect 
legislation, which they were convinced must arise from the con- 
tinuance of this contest; and they thought it due to the People 
of the Slate, that they should have the opportunity to make 
known their will concerning the transactions above detailed, 
before it should have become too late to make their will felt. 

In this effort they failed. The balloting was resumed from 
time to time ; three more days were consumed ; and on the 



twenty-sixth balloting, Mr. Charles Sumner was declared to 
have been elected, he having received 193 out of 385 votes, 
two blank ballots not being counted. It will be observed, that 
he had precisely the requisite number of votes ; and of these, 
upwards of 80 were thrown by Democratic members, procured 
by the means stated above. Thus was declared to be elected, 
as one of the two representatives of the State of Massachusetts 
in the Senate of the United States, for the term of six years, a 
man who received less than a majority of the votes of the mem- 
bers present and casting ballots, and who goes there " standing 
on the publicly professed principles of a party " which had only 
111 out of 393 members of the House of Representatives, and 
whose popular vote at the election in November last was only 
twenty-seven thousand out of one hundred and twenty thousand 
votes. 

Time was, when it would have been deemed an insult to the 
instinctive love of right which has characterized the people of 
this State, to do more than narrate these facts, to bring down 
on the contrivers and agents of this scheme, the indignation of 
all decent men. And notwithstanding the prevalence of party 
spirit, which now so controls men's minds, we do not believe 
that honest men, any where, can look calmly on this picture, 
with any sentiment except unmingled disgust. 

But the unblushing eftrontery with which these contrivances 
have been avowed, and the arguments, so called, by which their 
authors have endeavored to defend them, do, in our judgment, 
render it fit that their true character, and the principles involved 
therein, should be plainly stated. 

We think it due to the fair fame of our State, that such trans- 
actions should not go forth to the world in a silence which 
might be construed into an admission that they are in conform- 
ity with the usual principles and conduct of those who are trusted 
by the people of Massachusetts to make its laws. We think it 
due to the public morals, that the true character of such acts 
should not be obscured in any minds, by the miserable sophis- 
tries which have been thrown over them. And we therefore 
crave your candid attention to some considerations which we 
have to present to you. 

The persons who have acted together in the election of Sen- 
ator, under the bargain above set forth, have called themselves 



8 

" The Coalition." We must be permitted to deny the propriety 
of the name. A coalition is the union of two parties, for the 
purpose of carrying one or more measures, in which they con- 
scientiously agree. It is concert of action, proceeding from con- 
cert of opinion. It is a dangerous experiment, not only as re- 
spects the public confidence, but the principles of the two par- 
ties ; and no coalition known to political history has ever suc- 
ceeded in retaining, for any considerable time, the confidence of 
the public. 

But this is not a coalition. A compact between two distinct 
parties, having different political principles, for the purpose of 
dividing public offices between them,— a compact to do this by 
electing a man for Governor in whom the one party does not 
confide, in consideration of electing a man for Senator in whom 
the other party does not confide, is not a coalition, but a factious 
conspiracy. And when such a compact is made between those 
who have merely a delegated authority, held in trust, to be used, 
under the sanction of an oath, to place in office only those in 
whom the trustees do confide, it is a factious co7ispiracy to vio- 
late a public trust, atid as such, criminal, not only in morals, 
but in the law of the land. It is true, the statute law of the 
State has not defined this offence, as it has failed to do others. 
It may be because it was considered by all former Legislatures, 
that a statute describing and punishing such a transaction would 
be an impeachment of their honesty, which they would not 
suffer, as respected themselves, and were unwilling to suppose 
necessary to the public safety and morals, as might respect 
future Legislatures. But the common law which pervades soci- 
ety, and enters into the relations of life, both public and private, 
with its benign, but bracing influence, deems such an abuse of 
a public trust a misdemeanor, punishable by indictment. And 
there is high authority that a bargain like this, even when made 
by single persons, and in reference to subjects of far less public 
concern than this, is an indictable ofl'euce. In the year 1825, 
a case came before the highest criminal court of one of our sister 
States, wherein it appeared that A. and B. were justices of the 
peace, and as such had the right to vote in the county court for 
certain county officers ; that they agreed together, that A. would 
vote for C. for commissioner, in consideration that B. would 
vote for D. for clerk ; and that they voted in pursuance of that 



agreement. The statute of the State, like ours, did not reach 
the case. But their common law, the same as ours, declared — 
^' The defendants were justices of the peace, and as such held 
''an office of high trust and confidence. In that character they 
" were called upon to vote for others, for offices also implying 
*' high trust and confidence. Their duty required them to vote 
" in reference only to the merit and qualifications of the offi- 
" cers j and yet, upon the pleadings in this case, it appears that 
^' they wickedly and corruptly violated their duty, and betrayed 
" the confidence reposed in them, by voting under the influence 
^' of a corrupt bargain, or reciprocal promise, by which they 
" had come under a reciprocal obligation to vote respectively 
"for a particular person, no matter how inferior their qualifica- 
" tions to their competitors. It would seem, then, upon these 
"general principles, that the offence in the information is 
" indictable at the common law.* 

This is the manly and clear response of the common law — 
the inheritance of our fathers and ourselves — not only in that 
State, but wherever it prevails. And now, what are the differ- 
ences between that crime and the case we lay before you ? The 
parties to that bargain were electors in the court of a county ; 
the parties to this bargain were electors in the Legislature of 
Massachusetts. The parties to that bargain were two individ- 
uals, and their compact controlled two votes ; the parties to this 
bargain were numerous, and their compact controlled many 
votes; and every reflecting man must see, that a conspiracy be- 
comes more criminal, the more persons it embraces, and the 
more power it wields. The parties to that bargain made it 
" without reference to the qualifications of the candidates;" the 
parties to this bargain entered into it with an open declaration 
that one of the candidates was distrusted by one party ; and the 
person who was to be voted for by the other party was not even 
selected ; nothing being known, except that he was not to act on 
the principles which one of the parties who were to vote for 
him had long professed to hold dear. The subjects of the bar- 
gain in that case were a county clerk and a county commis- 
sioner ; the subjects of this bargain were the Governor of Mas- 
sachusetts and one of its Senators in the Congress of the United 

• Commonwealth v. Callaghan and al., (2 Virg. Cas. 460). 

2 



10 

States. And finally, in that case, it does not appear that the 
officers voted for by the criminals were actually elected ; while 
in this case it is known that this corrupt agreement made one 
man Governor, and caused another. to be declared elected a Sen- 
ator in Congress. 

Such is the case we lay before you for judgment. But before 
passing thereon, we request you to notice the grounds which 
have been relied on in its attempted justification or excuse. 

It is alleged that, inasmuch as neither of the three political 
parties in the Legislature had a majority, it was necessary to 
enter into this compact. To judge of the soundness of this 
plea, it is only requisite to bear in mind, that Congress does not 
assemble until the first day of December ; that the next session 
of the Legislature will begin on the seventh day of January j 
and therefore, if no election of Senator should have been made 
by this Legislature, the place need be vacant only about thirty 
days at the beginning of the long session of Congress, when no 
business of importance is to be expected, especially in the Sen- 
ate ; and out of these thirty days must come the Christmas hol- 
idays, during which no business is done. How far these parties 
were influenced by any idea of necessity, may be estimated from 
the fact, that by their united votes they chose Mr. Rantoul Sen- 
ator, at a time when he was known to be so distant from home 
that he did not take his seat in the Senate until fourteen days 
after his election, and that too at the close of the session, when 
the Senate was crowded with business of the greatest impor- 
tance to the country. So far, therefore, as concerns the Sena- 
torial election, the plea of necessity is false in fact. But if it 
were not so — if the like necessity existed for filling this office, 
as for organizing the State Government — are the political insti- 
tutions of Massachusetts such as to impose on those intrusted 
by the people with the high function of filling these great offices, 
the necessity of making a corrupt bargain, by which one party 
wilfully surrenders its own convictions, in consideration that 
another party will commit a like breach of trust ? We utterly 
deny this. We know that emergencies may arise, in which 
members of the Legislature, finding it impossible to place in 
office those men whom they believe best qualified, may be under 
a moral necessity to vote for others who are next best, in order 
to have a government. But let it not be lost sight of, for a mo- 



11 

ment, that these delicate and difficult emergencies are precisely 
the occasions on which every man is specially bound to keep his 
mind free from all improper biases. He has a difficult duty 
to perform, calling for the exercise of all the impartiality and 
wisdom which he possesses. And when it is whispered in his 
ear, or impudently proclaimed at a caucus, "Agree to vote for a 
man not yet known, for Senator of the United States, and we 
will put your candidate into the chair of State, though we care 
nothing about him, and do not confide in him," — who does not 
know that the tempter speaks to him? And how strange is the 
reason for listening — that an emergency has arisen, calling for 
more than ordinary circumspection, and a perfectly cool, clear 
and free judgment ! 

It may be said, by Democratic members, when we learned 
the name, and found it was Mr, Sumner, we were well enouo-h 
satisfied with his qualifications. We have satisfactory evi- 
dence that this is not true ; that not a few Democratic members 
voted for Mr. Sumner contrary to their own wishes and convic- 
tions, and solely because they considered themselves bound by 
the bargain to do so. But if there are any who can truly say, we 
were satisfied when we learned his name, the answer is, you had 
unfitted yourselves to judge. You had already placed yourselves 
under the influence of a tempting ofl^er, which you had accepted. 
You had made a bargain and received the consideration, and 
could no longer bring to the question that upright and unbiased 
judgment which alone would enable you to do your duty to the 
State. And when the Free Soil party were brought to the con- 
sideration of the question, which of two persons, Mr. Briggs or 
Mr. Boutwell, was best qualified for the place of Governor, does 
any man believe they were capable of deciding impartially and 
justly, when they found that, if they cast their votes for the 
latter, they could secure the prize of Senatorial power, at which 
they were so eagerly grasping ? No one can believe it. And 
yet, it is precisely this pressure on the judgment, which renders 
all bribery illegal and immoral. The essence of the ofience of 
bribery is not in the fact that one man has parted with his 
money, and another man has got it ; nor in the fact that an 
erroneous decision is made, or vote given. Lord Bacon said he 
sold justice, and not injustice ; and no man gainsayed it. The 
essence of the crime of giving and taking bribes, consists in the 



12 

pressure and strain which are thus made, and intended to be 
made on the fallible human judgment of one intrusted with 
authority. 

It has happened in this State that the vote of a single man 
in the Legislature elected the Governor, as the vole of a single 
man, in this Senatorial election, put an end to the ballotings. 
Suppose a man to have stood neutral, not being wholly satis- 
fied with either candidate ; and a sum of money, or any other 
temptation, is held out to him to vote for one of them, and he 
does so. Would you say he was to be held innocent, because, 
on the whole, he thought the man for whom he at last voted, 
was best qualified for the place? Would you not say to him, 
your crime consisted in placing yourself under influences which 
did not leave you free to judge ? We care nothing about your 
acts or your judgments afterwards; you were corrupted the7i, 
and deserve punishment therefor. 

It has also been suggested, that this was not a corrupt agree- 
ment, because no individual who was a party to it received, or 
had reason to expect, anything from it, to his own proper use. 
You cannot know that. A bargain with the Democratic party, 
to put the power of the State into their hands, is a bargain to 
give them the means to reward their friends, and punish their 
enemies. How far they who made the bargain expected to profit 
by it, either by obtaining offices for themselves, or their friends, 
or connections, or dependents, or by ejecting from office those 
whom they desired to injure, no man can tell. It is in the re- 
cesses of the mind, inscrutable, except to the eye of Him who 
looks into the heart, that these things lie hid. And this renders 
such bargains the more dangerous. The statute law can reach 
a case where money is given or promised. It is susceptible of 
proof. But nothing but the wise jealousy of the people can 
afford an effectual remedy for the secret, pervading and power- 
ful influence of hope of benefit, springing up in the hearts of 
leaders of a political party, when the power of the State is 
held out to them as an inducement to violate a trust. He, 
therefore, who seeks to purge this bargain of corruption, by the 
assertion that the parties to it expected no selfish benefit, asserts 
what he cannot know to be true, and what in all human prob- 
ability is false. It is unnecessary to refer to events to prove 
this. You know it must be so. But if you will watch the 



13 

executive appointments made, and which may be made, by this 
administration, you will see a practical exemplification of this 
truth. 

And let it not be forgotten, that the giver is as guilty as the 
taker. Let not the Free Soil party lay the flattering unction to 
their souls, that they are not to be suspected of entertaining any 
such selfish hopes. They held them out toothers; and the 
tempter is by all men justly considered worse than the tempted. 

But the corruption of this bargain does not consist solely in 
this. Its essence is found, not merely in what was taken, but 
in what was yielded. It is not merely that the Free Soilers 
were to have their unnamed man for Senator, but that, in con- 
sideration thereof, they were to vote for a man for Governor 
whom they distrusted. It is not merely that the Democrats 
were to have their man for Governor, but that, in consideration 
thereof, they were to vote for a man for Senator, who, so far as 
is even now known, has but one principle of political action, and 
that hostile to the long-cherished, and repeatedly and solemnly 
avowed sentiments and wishes of the Democracy of the State — 
a man whose only rule of action in the Senate of the United 
States must be, to create, what every American statesman, from 
the time of Washington to the present moment, has looked upon 
as a frightful evil, — a geographical party, — and which the De- 
mocracy of Massachusetts, up to the time of this bargain and its 
execution, had always shown themselves too wise and too patri- 
otic to aid or support ; — a man who, from the necessity of the 
case, by consenting to take this office under and by means of 
such a bargain, must thereby consent to stand as a receiver of the 
fruits of a breach of a public trust, and to go into a representative 
assembly to exhibit there the political principle of a small mi- 
nority, constituting one of the parties to the bargain, and the 
want of principle of both the parties by reason of which his 
election was made. We repeat, it is not merely in what is 
received, but in what is betrayed, that we must look for the 
true character of this transaction. 

Another ground upon which this bargain has been defended 
is, that such arrangements are common, and to be expected, in 
legislative assemblies. If this be so, it is time you knew it, and 
acted upon it. If it be common in your Legislature, for mem- 
bers to vote against their own convictions of right, in order to 



14 

induce other members to vote against their convictions of right, 
and thus secure to each some selfish or party ends, at the ex- 
pense of the public — it is time the people of Massachusetts swept 
out their halls of legislation, and purified them from this corrup- 
tion. The assertion is a libel on the honesty of the State ; and 
no man will make it, who does not take his own conscious 
wickedness as the standard by which to measure other men's 
honor. That such things have been done, we are forced to be- 
lieve J and the impudence with which this transaction has been 
proclaimed, does more than all other things known to us, to lead 
us to fear that their true character is not discerned by weak 
men, blinded by party spirit. That selfishness, party spirit, 
rashness, may lead men of loose principles, in the halls of legis- 
lation, as elsewhere, to do corrupt and wicked things, we do not 
doubt. But that they are common, that they have become a 
usage, that they have passed into a rule, and may be appealed 
to as a principle, we beg the people of Massachusetts not to 
believe. 

We deliberately assure you, it has not yet become common 
for those whom you select to represent yourselves, so grossly to 
abuse their trust. And we repel, with indignation, the assump- 
tion that they who, by inadvertence, or recklessness, or a pas- 
sionate love of power, or a blind devotion to party, or any worse 
motive, have become involved in this immoral and illegal com- 
pact, can find an excuse for it in the practices of any legisla- 
tive assembly known to us. But we feel obliged, not only to 
say that such conduct finds no excuse in example, but to call 
on the people of the Commonwealth to bear their testimony 
against it, however usual it may be asserted to be. It is not 
uncommon for men to steal, cheat, and lie; but the moral sense 
of mankind does not permit the frequency of these crimes to be 
their justification. 

And if it were admitted that it is common for members of 
the Legislature of Massachusetts to enter into bargains like this, 
it is submitted for your consideration, whether it would not be 
the more necessary that you should hasten to place thereon the 
seal of your condemnation. That public morals are essential to 
public order; that absolute fidelity to public trusts is the only 
secure basis of republican government ; and that no people is 
safe which passes over in silence even questionable acts of its 



15 



servants — are political truths which you have not yet to learn. 
That it is not lawful to do evil that good may come ; that there 
is not one rule of right in the capitol, and another by your fire- 
sides ; that the crooked paths of intriguers and schemers are not 
safe ways for honest men to travel, no people knows better than 
yourselves. We ask you to apply these principles to this mat- 
ter. You have placed us as sentinels upon the watch-towers. 
We have discerned these things which seem to us to threaten 
your security and welfare. With an earnest desire to do no 
injury to any man; with the judgment wherewith we should 
be content to be judged; without passion, but without fear, we 
have endeavored to do our duty to the Commonwealth and to 
you, by making known these transactions. You will determine 
whether your interests are safe in the hands of men who have 
grasped the offices and power of the State by such means ; and 
whether you are willing to commend to your children this ex- 
ample as safe to guide their steps. 



WILLIAM ASPINWALL. 
E. H. KELLOGG. 
TAPPAN WENTWORTH. 
JAMES H. BRIGGS. 
MONROE EMMONS. 
S. F. PLIMPTON. 
JOHN D. FISKE. 
W. A. HAWLEY. 
GEO. H. KUHN. 
WILLIAM HYDE. 
HARRISON GARFIELD. 
JAS. M. WILLIAMS. 
ELIPHALET JONES. 
JOHN BIGELOW. 
S. T. FAR WELL. 
ZENAS WATKINS. 

A. B. CRANE. 
H. N. BIGELOW. 
JUNIUS HALL. 
SCATTER COBB. 
WILLIAM BARNEY. 
CHAS. THEO. RUSSELL. 
ISAAC WOODS. 

JOHN F. PAYSON. 
DAVID LAWRENCE. 
EZRA LINCOLN. 
SIDNEY BARTLETT. 
CHARLES C. NUTTER. 

B. R. CURTIS. 
JOSEPH P. JOHNSON. 
JAMES SOUTH WORTH. 
SAMUEL HOOPER. 
PALMER MOREY. 
NATH. F. SAFFORD. 
RALPH SANGER. 
JASON REED. 
JOSEPH N. BREWER. 



ISAAC COBURN. 
LEWIS KINNEY. 
NATH. SEAVER. 
JOSEPH M. WIGHTMAN. 
ISAAC CARY. 
J. SLEEPER. 
F. O. PRINCE. 
DANIEL G. WHITE. 
HUDSON BATES. 
CLEMENT WILLIS. 
TISDALE DRAKE. 
SAMUEL H. WALLEY. 
ALPHEUS NETTLETON. 
GARDNER ELDREDGE. 
S. A. CHURCHILL. 
J. G. FROST. 
ETHAN BARNES. 
LORENZO GAYLORD. 
J. P. PUTNAM. 
GEORGE O. BRASTOW. 
AUGUSTUS STORY. 
BURGESS SALSBURY. 
JUSTIN JONES. 
MATTHIAS ELLIS. 
LEWIS R. CHESBROUGH. 
WILLIAM SCHOULER. 
EDWARD SHARP. 
EDWARD BROOKS. 
BENJA>HN POND. 
JAMES M. KEITH. 
THOMAS TRASK. 
HENRY FOBES. 
JOHN L. PLUMMER. 
S. H. BATCHELDER. 
GEORGE GARDNER. 
Z. D. BASSET. 
SAMUEL F. COOLIDGE. 



16 



JULIUS A. PALMIER. 
JOHN ODIN, Jk. 

F. SAWYER, Jr. 

A. B. MUNKOE. 
JAMES DIXSMOOR. 
THEODORE DUNN, 
JOHN ANDREWS. 
BENJAMIN CARTWRIGHT. 
FRANCIS D. BARTLETT. 
THOMAS KEMPTON. 
OBED NYE. 

RICHARD A. PALMER, 
RICHARD BORDEN. 
JAMES B. LUTHER. 
HENRY J. GARDNER. 
J. THOMAS STEVENSON. 
LEANDER CROSBY. 
LUCIUS FERRY. 
CHARLES C. BASSETT. 
CHARLES BOARDMAN. 
ELIJAH STEARNS. 
DUDLEY SMITH. 

G. D. LUND. 
THOMAS E. PAYSON. 
MORRIS KNOWLES. 
JEREMIAH COLMAN. 

B. EDWARDS. 
NEHEMIAH BALCH. 
WILLIAM KIMBALL. 
WM. F. NICHOLS. 
MOSES KIMBALL. 
JOSEPH B. F. OSGOOD. 
CHARLES M. RICHARDSON. 
JOHN PORTER. 

JOSEPH B. NYE. 
JOHN H. CLARK. 
THOS. HALL. 
S. M. ALI,EN. 
JOHN WELLS. 
SILAS TYLER 
BENJ. SEAVER. 
AVILLIAM C. FOWLER. 
JAMES BALDWTN. 
NATH. S. SIMPKINS. 
NATHAN BARNES. 
EBENEZER FREEMAN. 
JOSIAH SEABURY. 



ROBERT MARSH. 
WILLARD PHILLIPS. 
CIIAS. HUBBARD. 
ALBERT THORNDIKE. 
GILES S. CHAPIN. 
R. S. DANIELS. 
M. NEWELL. 
JOHN BOYNTON. 
THOS. STODDARD, 
STEPHEN HILLIARD. 
PETER FLETCHER. 
W^M. POPE. 
BILLINGS BRIGGS. 
THOS. J. SHELTON. 
JAMES MUNROE. 
PHILIP RUSSELL. 
CALVIN W. CLARK. 
NOAH WELLS. 
CHARLES WOOD. 
STEPHEN L. ARNOLD. 
EPHRAIM TOWER. 
N. B. PICKEIT. 
JOHN H. ORR. 
ROBERT L. COLBY. 
OTIS CLAPP. 
GEORGE WHITTEMORE. 
ANTHONY LANE. 
HENRY H. FULLER. 
WILLIAM RIPLEY. 
MARTIN KNIGHT. 
THOS. EDWARDS. 
SAMUEL KETTELL. 
JEFFERSON BANCROFT. 
FRANCIS BUSH. 
JOSEPH BEDLOW. 
JOHN MAYNARD. 
HANNIBAL POWERS. 
WM. RIPLEY. 
SETH BEMIS, Jr. 
J. H. WILKINS. 
JOSEPH BROWN. 
ISAAC JONES. 
BENJAMIN JAMES. 
WILLIAM EATON. 
L. W^ RUGG. 
CHARLES W. GUSHING. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



:. ; iill'l ' ' i.ll ill ''I I'l' iJ 1 
014 012 866 1 



